But, I will say this to those critics. This is your victory. You pushed Obama to do this. You made him evolve.

I do not care if you criticize the President. I care if you don’t vote for him over one issue. But now that he has answered your criticism and done what you wanted, it is literally the duty of those critics to support him.

DD: I doubt anyone would not vote for him because of that one issue. But I am sure those of us who wanted him to come out in favor of gay marriage will praise him on that issue now. I know I will. But there are other issues too.

Valentine – what you don’t seem to understand is that it isn’t the number of people that have swapped from Obama to Romney (I doubt that number has changed significantly) but the number of Republicans that have gone from “not likely to vote” to “likely to vote” or “very likely to vote”.

This is not a judgment on whether or not this is morally right (I think that same-sex marriage IS a right), but rather whether it changes the battleground.

Here’s my rule of thumb… when I am extremely happy with what a politician does I brace myself for a backlash. Know why? Because I flippin’ know that my positions are shared with only 20% of the population. That means 80% sorta agree with me or don’t agree with me at all.

Republicans now have a flag to rally around. Hope our side is ready to counter their efforts.

liberalgeek, that is a good point. However, I see Christian right websites all the time that were already lambasting Obama for being pro-gay. So I am just not sure that this is going to make that much of a difference. And it is not like he can really do anything. It’s up to the Court at this point. But I guess only time will tell.

And nemski, Isn’t persecuting a gay staffer just par for the course for the right? And the guy was a sexist pig anyway. I am never sympathetic when a gay Republican gets run out of the party or a job. What did he expect.

they were going to vote against Obama anyway.
there is a disgusting display of indifference for your fellow humans’ rights going on today. All this changes is the official position. NO ONE’s vote will be changed by this. The people who don’t like Obama were going to vote against him even if he said he would deport all the gays. they hate him. they hate him with a passion and STILL aren’t going to vote for Romney, but vote against Obama like they always were. Only the support from those who want civil rights for all people, and that will be increased. I really cant believe what im reading form some of you who would leave your brothers and sisters’ rights till after the election…. but wait, we CANT do it before the 2014 mid-terms…. no no no the 2016 election is TOO IMPORTANT to take that kind of a risk! Go back and read your comments. Go see how you thought other people’s rights shouldn’t be talked about because it might be a bad political move. disgusting.

ben shut the fuck up. you know we’re talking about turnout. i’m happy he made the decision he did. i’m just worried. and i better see your ass knocking on doors on your magic pony. we’re going to have to work harder now, that’s all. it’s for a good cause, it’s ok. we’re just going to have to work harder.

There are a lot of factors that play into turn-out. At some point you just have to stand on principle and let the chips fall where they may. At least you can look yourself in the mirror in the morning when you do that.

Thanks. I just feel like you’re being delusional if you think this isn’t a big deal and isn’t going to help the right rally and mobilize. They were talking about outlawing birth control just a few weeks ago.

There won’t be any federal legislation putting forward marriage equality, in the courts we’re all holding our breath to see how prop-8 turns out, states are still torn (as shown this week). Gay people WEREN’T going to vote for Romney. I think it’s awesome. I agree with him. I agree with YOU. I just don’t see a gain at all. If anything it just gives the crazies something to rally around.

and people like you won’t give him any credit anyway. just say “about time’ and then bitch about something else.

The thing is, I have been wanting the Party to come out for gay marriage for years, a decade probably, since it is a civil right issue and a matter of principle. So really, it is about time. Waiting for public opinion to change before standing on principle is hardly worthy of high praise. But yes, I am very happy he finally came around.

When DOMA is repealed and I get my federal benefits, I will be even happier.

There are plenty of reasons why Republicans would stay away from the polls in November (Mormon, Massachusetts healthcare act, flip-floppiness, pro-choice history, 2nd amendment issues, etc). Now there is a big one for them to hang their hat on.

I don’t see this giving anyone on our side the push they needed to go out to vote in November, but it should.

Wow, first Joe daMouth the other day, and now Obama. And they came out of nowhere with this sudden gay allegiance; not that it’s bad. It’s just that I think they are desperate in this election year. In a few months you might see why.
How about that chump Chaffinch getting hired as manager of Camden. How could any municipality hire this guy? Not only does he have NO EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE JOB, but he’s also got a history failed administration experience in the Del State Police where his misconduct costed us millions of dollars. He’s such a wag that he lost a run against DAVE WILSON by a slaughter (65% – 35%).

no LG, this is about PRINCIPLE remember? we need to look ourselves in the mirror no matter who’s president. That’s totally more important than avoiding a conservative supreme court for the next generation.

Exactly…but it won’t be long…because of taxes. I have gay friends who have to establish entirely different relationships tax wise because as a state filer they are married, as federal they are not…and in essence are probably committing fraud in how they file….only takes one test case to run it up the review and decision…won’t be long, I’m sure. An accountant’s nightmare–and an awkward position to put a law-abiding, tax-paying citizen in.

V – No this isn’t a game. In a game you can try stuff out because it doesn’t mean anything when you start another game. In the real world, there are consequences. I am not saying that the consequences are set in stone, and I’m not saying that they aren’t acceptable. I’m acknowledging their existence.

If this does cost Obama 2 states, it could mean that Ruth Bader Ginsburg is replaced by a conservative judge. It could mean that while Obama said that he supports same sex marriage, no meaningful changes will happen under President Romney. It could mean that in a few states that experience a bump in evangelical voters that come out (to vote) Dems could lose control of the Senate.

If you are happy to make a political statement that gets you exactly zero actual accomplishments but consolidates your opposition, rock on! I guess it’s just a game for you.

And if you think that isn’t possible, I present to you President Richard Nixon and his Southern Strategy.

You know, LG, one of the things that I’ve noticed this evening (where I get to see TV via my hotel room)and this is for the talking heads — it is the conservative ones playing defense. Especially since Rmoney came out today and staked out a position less generous that BushCo and Cheney. And I think that the wingnuts who hate this will be all over TV and the radio *not* drumming up support from independents.

The key to the BushCo use of the culture war was to make sure that anti-gay measures were on the ballot in swing states. And if I recall, the anti-gay measures passed. It will be hard to go back to that well. Plus, I’m cynically thinking that the Obama people know full well what the numbers on this look like and they don’t look anything like those in 2004 when Kerry took his defensive crouch and matched GWB’s position. If they thought this would have hurt them, I really doubt that they would have done it.

my /sarcasm/ didn’t show up LG. I don’t think it’s a game, but unfortuantely the other parties, the media, etc. treat it like one so i guess we’ve got to play

Agreed 100% about the strategy with Ginsberg. I love her to death, but there’s no way she’s gonna hang in until 2016. I’m starting to wonder if we could possibly lose Kennedy too. They’re going to have to drag Scalia out.

I’ve said here many times that we need an obama presidency just to maintain the court status quo.

Hey, good on Obama. I’m not going to say “it’s about time.” It took some political courage to do this, as it might cost him with the black Christian vote. It might not make any practical difference — as he pointed out, it’s not in his hands — but this is the sort of statement of principle that people on the left are yearning for.

Again, good on him. And don’t worry, nemski, the missus takes care of the donations.

When Clinton was elected I was at the gay rights march and I just CRINGED. That’s when we wound up with DADT. Stupid thing to blow his political capital on (that and Hilary trying to reform healthcare)… just brought the whole presidency to a damn halt.

But no amount of Obama’s appeasement of the lunatic right has gotten us near where I thought we’d be now. The D coalition is shaky… and NC’s vote showed that. I don’t think he can get this spavined horse across the finish line unless he just becomes the BOSS of this circus. Not Egghead in Chief, not the Great Concilliator, just the BOSS. The Commander in Chief. If Obama is willing to risk that, the Dems (including myself) will march into the fire with him, not because he’s the alternative to Muddy Middle Romney, but because that’s what gets us. We love a good fight on the edge every bit as much as those Onward Christian Soldier types.

I know Obama is smarter than me so I am racking my brains trying to figure out how this will help him. But all I can come up with is that it is the right thing to do. That can’t possibly be the right answer.

On the one hand, it will paint Romney into a social conservative corner. On the other hand, voters kind of like that particular corner when it comes to gay marriage, especially in certain important states.

Or maybe Obama found it was more harmful to keep on waffling on the issue.

Yes, it literally can cost the election. I suspect when the story comes out one day, it will turn out to be based on bad political advice from inside the bubble.

Where are these masses of homophobic blacks you all keep talking about? Im quite sure that many Christians who are also black have bigoted tendencies, that’s what a lot of religious people do, but do you think it is a single issue for them? IS Obama’s position on the matter more important than income inequality? I think he’ll lose as many black voter with this as he will gain gay republicans.

I think this move is aimed at the youth vote, which overwhelmingly supports sanity and equality. Remember, 2008 saw the second highest turnout of 18-29 year olds, and 66% of them voted for Obama. Team Obana realizes they need to excite the “kids” again, or else they could be in trouble. President Obama siding with “us” on what is a very generational issue is one way to remind us why we voted for him in the first place.

Puck, obama is just trying to change the subject. In real estate sales, everone knows it is all about the 3 ls, location, location, location. This election is going to be about the economy, the economy, the economy. Obama is desperately trying to change the subject and leed everyone on a wild goose chase. But his tactic is not going to work, because this time, his record is out there for all to see.

The only reason people are not bowing down and worshiping the ground Obama walks on, is because they don’t know the facts.

As the election cycle uncovers the real facts, the Republicans will look worse and worse and worse…

Example: Obama grew more jobs than Bush did his entire term, after only one month in office. Fact.

TARP did work at growing jobs. As soon as it was implemented the downward trend turned around.

The Bush Tax Cuts, when re-enacted in 2010, are the job killer that caused the slow growth. The Tea Party policies that began in 2011, Every chart show it. Growth, growth, growth… tax cut… drop, drop, drop, TARP… growth, growth, growth..

The debt ceiling crises cause solely by the Tea Party Republicans caused a drop in confidence. It slowed growth by two years. As it became obvious that the House of Representatives was unstable and for lack of a better word, run by crazy fools, it became obvious that now was not a good time to invest ones money.

Corporate profits ARE HIGHER TODAY THAN THEY WERE IN 2006!!!!!!!!! There is therefore tons of money to invest and grow the economy. There is more money available now than during the Clinton Boom. There is more money available now than during the Reagan Boom. There never, never, never, never in our lifetimes, has been this amount of corporate money available to invest in our economy. Obama did his part. He oversaw the most rapid corporate turnaround in our history, and probably the history of the world. The main problem with today’s levels of employment, is that corporation’s tax rates are sooooooooo low, and they are making soooooooooo much, so why would they want to invest in an expansion whose rates will be so low it is actually going to COST them money, when you can just sit back and report record record profits? Obviously the answer is to tax them highly, but not tax the part that is put towards expansion. How easy is that?

As the private sector has grown jobs.. the Tea Party has cut government jobs. Check the charts; all the job losses lately has come from government. The economy is being damaged by these Republicans.. Every chart shows it..

Republicans can say Obama is bad for the economy. They can also say that polar bear shit is white. But in both cases they can never offer evidence that their words ring true… BECAUSE THERE ISN’T ANY!!!!!!!!!!!!

ALL EVIDENCE POINTS TO DEMOCRATS AS BEING THE ONES DOING EVERYTHING RIGHT FOR THE ECONOMY AND REPUBLICANS BEING THE ONLY REASON IT IS NOT WORKING.

If and when you find a Republican willing to put his finger up the ass of a polar bear, dug out some shit and bring it back in a Janvier ring box to show off, then, and only then will I believe polar bear shit is white…(or taxes are too high they cost jobs.)

Until they show proof, they are talking out their ass… That is why as the information comes out through this election, and it will, Americans will not only see that Democrat policies really do make the economy work better, but they will also see just how harmful Republican policies have damaged our recovery (every chart show it) and they will also learn, since these charts are available in real time, that throughout the entire time Republicans were arguing polar bear shit was white, they already knew it was brown… They lied.

Rusty just doesn’t know. He’s repeating what he gets told so, be nice, don’t blame him. But those telling Rusty about the polar bears, know exactly what they are doing. I just hope for his sake, when Rusty goes to find out for himself, his polar bear is sleeping soundly.

“The Bush Tax Cuts, when re-enacted in 2010, are the job killer that caused the slow growth. ”

Thank you, kavips for noting this. Those tax cuts were also job-killers in 2001 but the effects were masked by the stimulatory real estate bubble. The rich can have their damn Bush 36% personal tax rate; it’s the radical changes to investment taxes that super-charted the vulture capitalists and fundamentally changed business behavior away from hiring and investment, and now they need to go back to 1997 rates.

Valentine, it is so hard to get facts; it takes so long a time. Which is why most of us pay for information: here is my $3.00 give me a News Journal. here is my online fee, get me past the paywall.

But once there, we are not getting facts for our money. We are getting “someone’s” opinion.

Try this exercise: as you read through a paper, (and it has to be print because the mind can’t go back and analyze if it is electronic), count the number of “opinions” in the news story. Usually they are prefaced by the word “thinks”. Such as Romney thinks low taxes spur the economy. Obama thinks green energy will create jobs for the future.

Fact is: taxes that are not high enough to bring money from the top to the bottom, dry up the economy from the bottom up. When the bottom runs out of money, their recession trickles up… Fact is, if you build solar and wind farms, it will require people to assemble and put the pieces together.

If we got all the facts, we could make informed decisions. When we get skewed data, we somehow find ourselves making skewed choices.

Recessions always follow tax cuts. The Great Depression was caused by the no tax era in the Twenties. The Reagan recession, the one that we got out of by deficit spending in the finest Keynesian fashion, was caused by tax cuts. Tax cuts caused the recession of 91. The Bush tax cuts as Puck notes above, damage the economy and were responsible for both the Republican Recession and negative job growth over Bush’s 8 years.

The converse, that of raising taxes, led to the booms of WWII when taxes were almost 100%.. Putting a lance into the pus Republicans tout when they say high taxes cost jobs. Because when taxes were 100% we had full employment, actually negative employment because many had to work two jobs. Bill Clinton raised taxes and the economy took off; the stock market ran from $3000 to $12000. People love it when taxes are high. They may grumble but their actions show differently. That makes no sense.

but it does. If you are getting taxed on profits you make, which makes more sense to you? To report super high profits and give them all to the government? Or… expand your business, pay for that expansion, and say, see, we didn’t make money this year. Most likely you opt to invest in your own business because at least that way, the money you made stays in your hands, and not the Federal government.

It is like if you got to deduct from your tax bill, any amount you spent on your roof that year.. which would you choose?

Higher taxes make jobs jump out of nowhere. Low taxes create high profits, which mean there is an incentive not to expand, not invest in one’s people or ones physical capital…

So, yes Valentine, there is a Santa Claus and it is higher tax rates for corporations.

“The Reagan recession, the one that we got out of by deficit spending in the finest Keynesian fashion, was caused by tax cuts. ”

My understanding was that the Reagan recession was caused by punishing interest rates designed to wring inflation out of the system at a horrible human cost – marriages broken, homes lost, careers ended, college plans cancelled, entire industries destroyed, etc.

The Reagan tax cuts were steep, but started from taxes that were too high. The Bush tax cuts however started from taxes that were just right if not a little low, so therefore they were more damaging than the Reagan cuts. Plus the Bush cuts featured a jaw-dropping cut on dividend taxes from 39% to 15%.

The Right

Archives

CONTACT DL

If you wish to contact Delaware Liberal, you can do it two ways. The first is to click the Got A Tip link at the top of the page. Or, if you would like to contact a DL contributor directly, just send an email to the contributors name (Cassandra_M, DelawareDem, Nemski or Pandora) followed by @delawareliberal.net.